Hi all, Somewhat in response to Jimbo's post, I thought I'd offer an example of an article I've been working on, which has a massive number of footnotes. Pretty much every sentence in it I wrote with reference to one website or another, so I footnoted them all. Perhaps I suspect some of it is dodgy, so I prefer the source being explicitly stated. Anyway: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnac_stones I would like to hear from people whether they consider this level of footnoting excessive, about right, deficient etc. I believe that this article may almost meet WP:V, if it wasn't for the fact that most of the sources are amateur websites. The sentence about Kermarquer is definitely Original Research, but I'm sure sooner or later I'll find a source to back me up. Steve